Highway Construction in Amazon Raises Environmental Concerns Ahead of COP30

A new highway is under construction through the Amazon rainforest for the COP30 climate summit in Belém, Brazil, raising significant environmental concerns. Despite government assertions of its sustainability, locals fear further deforestation and loss of wildlife habitat, which contradicts the summit’s climate goals. Economic benefits for the region are acknowledged, but the residents’ voices remain largely unheard, leading to ethical questions about the summit’s objectives.

The Brazilian state government is constructing a new four-lane highway through a substantial section of protected Amazon rainforest for the COP30 climate summit in Belém. This highway aims to facilitate access for over 50,000 attendees, including global leaders, at the conference scheduled for November. While officials describe the project as “sustainable,” local residents and conservationists express profound concerns regarding its damaging environmental repercussions.

The Amazon rainforest is essential for carbon absorption and biodiversity, making the deforestation for this highway appear contradictory to the summit’s purpose. Presently, the highway’s construction spans over 13 kilometers (8 miles) and features a stark contrast of cleared land and towering rainforest trees. Heavy machinery is disrupting the delicate ecosystem by paving wetlands within the protected area.

Claudio Verequete, a local resident, reported that he lost his income source from açaí berry harvesting due to the highway construction. He asserted, “Everything was destroyed” and voiced concern regarding potential future deforestation induced by increased accessibility to businesses, questioning his community’s long-term security within the area.

The project threatens to isolate two segments of protected forest, which could disrupt wildlife movement and endanger local species. Professor Silvia Sardinha, a wildlife veterinarian, emphasized the detrimental effects of deforestation: “From the moment of deforestation, there is a loss.” This sentiment underscores the challenges in rehabilitating animals injured by human activity, made more complex by the proximity of the highway.

Although Brazilian officials describe the summit as “historic” focusing on the Amazon, critics assert that local voices remain unheard. The state of Pará had proposed this highway, named Avenida Liberdade, as early as 2012 but faced delays due to environmental concerns. Now, various infrastructure initiatives are being resurrected to accommodate the summit.

Infrastructure Secretary Adler Silveira championed the highway as a “sustainable” and essential mobility solution, promising features such as wildlife crossings and solar lighting. Elsewhere in the city, investments exceeding $81 million are made to expand airport capacity and develop public parks, expected to enhance urban amenities for the populace.

Some local business owners perceive the ongoing developments as beneficial for economic growth. Dalci Cardoso da Silva, who operates a stall in the Ver-o-peso market, noted that expanding infrastructure increases visitor traffic and sales. However, others, like João Alexandre Trindade da Silva, acknowledged potential challenges while expressing hope for actionable climate solutions arising from summit discussions.

As the COP30 summit approaches, the rising scrutiny surrounding the environmental costs of accommodating participants grows, raising ethical questions regarding the summit’s overarching goals in relation to significant infrastructural developments.

The construction of a new highway through the Amazon for COP30 highlights the tensions between infrastructure development and environmental conservation. While government officials claim the project is essential for the summit and the local economy, it raises serious concerns about deforestation, wildlife impacts, and the marginalization of local voices. The consequences of these actions may contradict the very goals of the climate summit, as environmental costs are weighed against development benefits.

Original Source: www.bbc.com